Marra and Kriol : the loss and maintenance of knowledge across a language shift boundary

Abstract

Increasingly, the field of linguistics is highlighting and attending to global patterns of diminishing linguistic diversity but to a significant extent it remains unclear what the loss of a language actually entails in cultural terms. In the Roper River Region of the Northern Territory few Marra people speak their heritage language, shifting almost completely to becoming a Kriol-speaking population. This study considers the Marra language and its speakers and the Kriol spoken by young adults to explore loss and maintenance evidenced in the lexicons of the two languages and cultural and linguistic practices of speakers of both languages. A detailed timeline embeds the study in its social and cultural context (Chapter 2), populating it with stories of those whose lives intersect various stages in the shift. A survey of the lexicon of Kriol (Chapter 3) demonstrates the extent to which Marra lexical material and associated denotata have infiltrated the newer, supplanting language. This survey reveals a previously under-documented prevalence of Marra verbs in Kriol (Chapter 4), belying popular notions that substrate lexical material most commonly occurs in nominal classes. Person reference and the domain of kinship are considered (Chapter 5). A comparison of kin categories and kinterms used by Marra and Kriol speakers shows that Kriol speakers use fewer kinterms and have collapsed some distinctions found in Marra. Yet many categories and some lexical forms are maintained in Kriol, while the use of kinterms in person reference and other pragmatic uses, such as politeness strategies, is similar across both languages. Additionally, Kriol speakers have innovated upon their kinship system in some ways not attested in Marra or English. Finally, the domain of ethnobiology is considered, with specific attention paid to traditional medicine - a domain typically thought to clearly show the effects of shifts in language and lifestyle. A first pharmacopeia of Marra bush medicine is presented (Chapter 6), followed by a quantitative study of Kriol speakers' knowledge and use of bush medicine (Chapter 7). This reveals a shift in the salience of ethnobiological taxa in relation to the ceremonial lives of Kriol speakers and an overall reduced knowledge base. However, Kriol speakers are found to be maintaining core health beliefs pertaining to bush medicine, and display a greater degree of knowledge, usage and nomenclature than had been previously described. Given the large-scale social disruption and lifestyle changes that have occurred since Marra ceased being transmitted to children, it is impossible to reach definitive conclusions about the manifestations that the loss of the language has for the ontology of Kriol-speaking Marra people. This study describes numerous continuations of lexical use, pragmatics and cultural practices among Kriol speakers, alongside expected areas where Kriol speakers' cultural practices and language use does not reflect the knowledge of their Marra speaking forebears and the intricacies of their language. Given the examples of maintenance and innovation, I warn against simplistic negative generalisations about the effects of language loss on the culture of generations who live on the other side of language shift boundaries.